Yesterday (June 7, 2018, 5:30 p.m.) a meeting-discussion was held with the management of BNT in the meeting room of the Union of Bulgarian Artists regarding the “task for a new graphic logo of the Bulgarian National Television”, which we also informed you about.
After the announcement of the competition, a large part of the professional guild immediately raised its voice not only against the way in which the task was announced, but also against the general desire of the National Television to remove the logo of Stefan Kanchev, created in 1959.
On the artists' side, the audience included Kiril Zlatkov, Filip Popov, Svetlin Balezdrov, Svoboda Tsekova, Milena Valnarova, Anton Staykov, Stoyan Dechev, Filip Boyadzhiev, Dimitar Traichev, as well as students and colleagues from various universities. Konstantin Kamenarov (General Director of BNT and Chairman of the Board of Directors of BNT) and Gerasim Slavov (Director of the Marketing and Communication Directorate) were representatives of BNT, along with reporter Ayshe Sali and cameraman Nikolay Balkanski.
We would like to note at the outset that, as both parties shared and agreed, there was no legal violation in the procedure taken by the television. However, whether it was correct is another question.
Here is what Filip Boyadzhiev (assistant at the National Academy of Arts and lecturer in the Master's program "Graphic Design of Non-Print Media") wrote hours before the meeting. We are publishing his statement with his permission and due to the fact that he presented some of the main problems in the television announcement in a very accessible language: "Let us assume at the beginning that the national television has outgrown the world name in the trademark Stefan Kanchev and wants to update its visual language. I do not want to comment on whether this is good or bad, but whenever you bury a classic, it is right to think before doing so, making a serious strategy and justification.
An institution like this carries a great responsibility on its shoulders. It dictates, or if that is an exaggeration, it has a serious role in educating the taste of current and future generations. (…) Let’s get into the specifics. If you all think that this is a competition for a new logo, BNT probably doesn’t think so. According to them, this is an “assignment”. We hit the first wall with the title. I don’t think that the general public is in the classroom to be given assignments? However, it is possible that they didn’t call it a competition because another very important thing from such a competition is actually missing, namely a jury. Reading further, we notice something else, there is also no reward for the assignment, but let’s stop with the omissions and focus on the little that is written.
The purpose of the assignment is “Creating a new graphic sign of BNT”, which should “symbolize its public function, its traditions and goals as a national institution and the most objective source of information.” A problem that I have been observing in similar texts lately are the extremely hollow and meaningless requirements that a logo must meet. In our case, “objectives as a national institution” caught my eye. If the organization, in this case BNT, has such and wants them to be reflected visually, perhaps it would be appropriate to share them…
We continue with the target group, namely “The comprehensive audience of BNT, regardless of age, gender and social status”, I really want to replace “comprehensive” with universal. Any marketing specialist will tell you that such institutions have a specific target (target audience), something that should be calculated, based on research. As an example, I will give the well-known motorcycle brand Harley Davidson, whose target is a 60-year-old accountant, specifically, huh! I don’t think it should be so narrow, but at least it should exist. (…) In “Terms of Participation” we understand that a lame, crippled and crippled person has the opportunity to take part in the “task”. I think it's time in our dear homeland to start respecting something called a profession, because we've seriously set out to make a joke come true: Knowing what kind of engineer I am, I'm afraid to go to the doctor. It also becomes clear that BNT is an extremely generous sponsor, giving us the opportunity to shower it with suggestions to make sure that everything will fit. Let's not forget that a logo also has specific uses (especially if it's displayed on a screen) and perhaps it's appropriate to present some technical information on the subject.
Recently, it has become very fashionable to hold super-open logo contests. In my opinion, this is a non-working practice. A narrow contest with up to 4 participants, pre-selected for their achievements, is a good practice, but those oriented towards the general public lose their weight and, accordingly, the level is low. Experience shows that in order to truly reflect the essence of an organization, you need to delve deeply into its logic. This is usually not a one-sided process, as in an open contest. These are months of serious work and communication with the sponsor, so that the final result can be maximally related to the specific company and achieve the set goals and, accordingly, cost money.
To summarize, I will say that no matter how much I think about our case, 2 scenarios are spinning in my head. One is that there is already “our person” who may have even developed the sign, and all this work is just a screen to wash their hands of it. The second scenario is unfortunately a tragedy. Apparently, there are no competent people at the Bulgarian National Television who would NOT know how to conduct a competition for a trademark, but would simply ask the experts in the field what this animal is and whether it has a place in our country. All of the above facts are extremely unacceptable and sad, but unfortunately reality.”
Konstantin Kamenarov denied that the competition was “rigged”, justified the broad and non-restrictive spectrum of the assignment with the aim of receiving as many proposals as possible from as many people as possible, and his wish is “I want it to be modern, I want it to be glamorous!” and thanked his colleagues for the enthusiasm and the discussion they provoked. And added that whatever happens from now on, the new logo and vision must be ready by September! It was as if in the entire conversation the director failed to understand two very important things. One, that the logo that the television is currently using is incorrectly presented compared to the original project by Stefan Kanchev. And the second, that in fact a logo does not fix and does not save the situation, and this is a long work process by a team both on the artistic side and on the side of the sponsor (in this case BNT) and the work includes many more components and details than “just a trademark”.
Three important questions were asked yesterday:
– Who wrote the assignment? – Gerasim Slavov (Director of the Marketing and Communication Directorate)
– Who would be the jury? – the answer was “would be!”
– Is BNT ready to remove the competition from its website and prepare a new one with the help of the guild? – “Yes, but we need a new assignment quickly! Within three days?”
On June 13, 2018 at 10:00 a.m., three representatives of the artistic side of the conversation will hold a second meeting with the management of the media outlet in the BNT building. These will be Anton Staykov (from the Union of Bulgarian Artists), Filip Boyadzhiev (from the National Academy of Arts) and Filip Popov (from the business side).
We will expect more information from them themselves, as they will have the difficult task of defending the position and profession of an extremely large number of colleagues.
We will leave aside the debate on whether or not Stefan Kanchev's sign should be changed, as this issue is the subject of another type of discussion.
Photos and text: Milena Radeva
Add comment